3 ms·
Not empirical because there's no money to fund such studies, but: Mandatory veganism would almost certainly significantly reduce the healthcare (and food) costs
by christophilus 4y ago
Not empirical because there's no money to fund such studies, but: Mandatory veganism would almost certainly significantly reduce the healthcare (and food) costs for a society by a large fraction. Banning cars would make the air cleaner, remove a bunch of health problems, and facilitate more social forms of travel which would help form a more cohesive society and probably would reduce a lot of problems which arise from modern urban isolation.
I'd personally like to live in a society where people were mostly vegan, there were no cars, and there were no firearms.
Whether or not we should force that is another question, but it sure sounds nice.
- Mordisquitos 4y agoYes, as I pointed out in an answer to a sibling comment, the effects of global veganism and car-lessness could indeed be positive—that's why they are lofty ideals. My answer was challenging the suggestion that “the same argument” from the original commenter could be used to argue for mandatory veganism or the banning of cars. In other words, the forced bit.
- slothtrop 4y agoMandatory veganism isn't going to prevent kids from being murdered in their schools, which is the salient issue.
- kbelder 4y agoIt might, due to the reduction of testosterone.